That's less than the size of an Olympic-class swimming pool, and must be considered in the reported amount of water reported to have leaked from the site since March 11, 2011.
This is not to make this reported leak seem unimportant, only to note that reported leaks measured in metric tons is misleading, and not in a way favorable to "TEPCO."
Water weighs a lot.
And, Of course, water is never "radioactive." It can hold radioactive matter in suspension, but water does not ionize.
A month or so ago calculations estimated that the total amount of water holding radioactive matter in suspension water leaked from Fukishima from March 11, 2011 through January 4, 2014) was estimated at 2/3ths the capacity of a Boeing 747 "large cargo freighter" aircraft.
Of course, press reports upon which such estimations were calculated sis not specify which "ton" they were referencing; Metric (2205 lbs) or English (2,000 lbs.), etc.
Again, I'm not downplaying the ass-hattery, cover-ups, real deaths of personnel, long-term threats to everyone in the Home Islands or any other real danger. But these reports are meaningless without referencing measurements of water using normal liquid terminology, nor without reports that also estimate the degree of radioactive contamination in the water.
In short, just saying "tons" of "radioactive (or contaminated) water" is essentially meaningless and useless.
I don’t think this what you wanted to say. Water naturally ionizes which makes it the great “Universal Solvent”.
I think you wanted to say something to the effect that water does not decay or have isotopes.
Actually, a small proportion of the water contains tritium, rather than hydrogen, or a radioactive isotope of oxygen in place of the stable oxygen. All substances have some level of radioactivity.
The question is, how much of the fuel rod material actually dissolved in the water? My guess is little to none. Just being near a radioemitter does not make a material radioactive.
I find these reports on the Daiichi plant heavy on sensationalism, light on facts. While this situation has been a boon to the anti-nuke fearmongers, it is not so great for attempts to continue to provide clean, non-bird killing energy.
From the article:
The operator of the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear plant says 100 tons of water containing record high levels of radioactive substances overflowed from a storage tank.
Also:
... the leaked water contained... ...230-million becquerels per liter of beta-ray emitting substances, consisting mainly of strontium 90.
The level is about 7.6 million times the government's permissible standard for the nuclide level of water allowed to be released into the sea.
...they also detected 9,300 becquerels per liter of cesium 137 in the water.
Is "100 metric tons" of contaminated water "less favorable" to Tepco than "26,407 gallons" of contaminated water?
Checking Tepco's website, it turns out that "100 tons" is straight from their press release:
http://www.tepco.co.jp/en/press/corp-com/release/2014/1234394_5892.html